JAPAN'S PLAN to Ruin the PRICE of OIL and GAS - VisualPolitik EN
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ก.ย. 2022
- Thanks to Masterworks for sponsoring! Skip the waitlist and invest in blue-chip art for the very first time by signing up for Masterworks: masterworks.art/visualpolitiken
With Masterworks you can purchase shares in great masterpieces from artists like Pablo Picasso, Banksy, Andy Warhol, and more.
See important Masterworks disclosures: www.masterworks.io/about/disc...
🏗👉 Do you like what we do and want this project to keep growing? Support us on Patreon and enjoy benefits!: / visualpolitik
*Recommended video: Hydrogen: Checkmate to OIL's Dominance? • Hydrogen: Checkmate to...
The accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant led to the shutdown of Japan's powerful network of nuclear power plants. Now, however, Japan has decided to once again turn to nuclear energy, and this time not only to produce electricity. In this video we tell you about Japan's plans and how it hopes to reinvent the nuclear industry.
Thanks to Masterworks for sponsoring! Skip the waitlist and invest in blue-chip art for the very first time by signing up for Masterworks: masterworks.art/visualpolitiken
See important Masterworks disclosures: www.masterworks.io/about/disclaimer
Erratum: At minute 08:59, when we say that "the core cannot go into fusion," we wanted to say that a core meltdown cannot happen.
It’s not going to end with anyone dumb enough to invest 😂
@@Selfmade99900 That and art historically has been how modern money laundering works. Especially in getting the money out of Western countries without raising suspicions of local banks or government banking agencies.
@@TK199999 you know the rules don’t work the same for the everyday person because the average person don’t know how to rig the market
Ruptly is Russian propaganda.
Obviously you don't use their footage with propaganda intent.
But the fact is that :
A - being associated with Russia, decrease trust in your content
B - people don't know Ruptly is Russian propaganda and people will assume its a credible news source because you share their content
Your content is quality, so please stop giving publicity to Russian propaganda
Masterworks is a well known scam
Let us also not forget that every reactor which has ever experienced a meltdown was based on a 50+ year old design, and that every single one built in the newer generations do not have those old failure modes as a possible outcome.
5th generation nuclear energy power plants are efficient and safe.
And U.S. nuclear subs have NEVER had a problem!
All of france has never really had a peoblem.
Not only that but most nuclear waste isn't highly radioactive for long periods. Some can be stored above ground on site in concrete and glass and are safe enough for workers to wall around.
What is dangerous for a long time can safely and easily be buried on site for millions of years. We also got a lot of new, easier to make and safer technologies being made now
@@veramae4098 regarding US subs: that is not true. But I can't say more than that. What I can say is that every Uranium based nuclear reactor design is dangerous; some more than others. New ones are a lot better than old ones, but throw enough damage at them and they can melt down too. The only reactor design I've liked is the Thorium molten salt designs, because while you could have a catastrophic release of radioactive molten salt, you could not have a meltdown. But Thorium isn't very useful for making things that go boom.
Let's not forget someone can bomb your nuclear power plants in the event of a conflict. What's the failure mode for that possible outcome?
@@AndyLowe-net thats protected by the same thing that prevents them from just straight up nuking you.
If they go to that point the power plant is the least of your issues
In the case of France, governments have been saying for 15 years that they wanted to stop the nuclear industry. What did happen? Companies (not only EDF, but also suppliers for parts, maintenance…) didn’t invest, they let people retire without renewing their staff, few students wanted to start a career in an industry which should be shut down in the following decades. Under Hollande they had even started to shut down reactors.
Und now we’re wondering why there’s no replacement solutions while a bunch of reactors slowly approach their life expectancy…
Nuclear is bad , it’s motivated by greed and endangering people life’s and their nation especially if this goes wrong .
Remember that it is not government but people that have wanted to stop it. We have one reaktor maybe coming online, it helps alot since everyone has been been leeching from russians and other third world countries.
@@Jay_Kay666 Exactly. French people voted for Hollande, who promised to shut down Fessenheim and to bring the nuclear share of the electricity mix down to 50%.
This is pretty true, governments make more or less what people want (at least in democraties). However, it’s questionable if everyone has the knowledge and competence to make decision about a complex topic like energy policies and strategies
@TrueFact Fessenheim NPP cannot be recommissioned as the primary loop has already been acid washed.
The rest of the french fleet wasn't scheduled to be decommissioned. Reactors were stopped this summer because scheduled heavy decennal maintenance that was postponed during covid had to be performed and because some stress induced corrosion was discovered due to newer testing methods.
French reactors are coming back online, but they are already behind schedule and they absolutely cannot power most of europe on their own.
I live in Germany and nuclear power is the perfect example for my country's biggest weakness: irrational fear. The best part about this is that German politicians seem to prefer complaining about the energy price instead of just reactivating nuclear power plants while the taxpayer even has to pay for their maintenance eventhough we don't get a single kw/h out of them 😂😂😢😢 (pls send help)
The problem is that we lump all nuclear power plants into one pot. A lot has happened in terms of technology in the last 30 years - the last German reactor is from 1989. Our reactors are old timers. There is newer, smaller, safer, more efficient, cleaner reactors - and actually a lot of innovation happening as we speak.
The idea of "reactivating" is populism so. It's if one factors in cost, time and price per MWh as result of reactivating old nuclear power plants, that seems like the most uneconomic and unsafest way to re-nuclearize in the longrun. Basically, pushing billions into making a VW Golf 1running again for a short lifespan instead of investing into a Tesla. To use a (admittingly bad) metaphor.
@@lbb101 No more need to close 30 yr reactor than 30 yr old bridge. They are all steel and concrete in the end, needing periodic maintenance. Never been a single person killed by German commercial rector radiation, which no other bug industrial operation eg chemicals can claim. You don’t need new, that’s just an excuse to continue closing old. Turn them all back on, everyone.
The issue is water solubility of radionuclides that then bond to the oxygen in the water that then evaporates under equillibrium conditions and flow around the planet. Nuclear reactors release "normalized discharges" of emissions that contain Tritium, Carbon-14, noble gases, Iodine-131, particulates and an "other" category. All the while most of you think they are a emission free and carbon free energy source. Just to have a nuclear reactor, international safety standards state that these reactors should not power themselves and must be fed 2 different forms of power with offsite power that is primarily fossil fuel power stations and a backup generator that runs on diesel fuel. That is not carbon free or even carbon neutral at that point and for what? 10% of our global energy needs of which we see 10% of power wasted everyday around the world. It's nonsense and not about power and only about uranium daughter procurement.
The worst part is how we built nuclear reactors and never turned them on, because of some last minute vote
@@paulmobleyscience Nonsense. An individual reactor generally does not power its own cooling, but there is nothing wrong with a separate nuclear plant powering another and so on, and of course this has long been done in high share nuclear countries like France w its 50 reactors, or in Sweden, Ontario. Furthermore, small modular reactor designs approved by the US NRC don’t need independent grid powered cooling. They can shut down and cool w ambient in isolation.
And, *you* “discharge” C-14 every time you breath out, along w every other animal, none of which is a hazard. Modern Nuclear plants are entirely free of green house gas emissions, or any other environmental hazard, where a “hazard” is a toxin with a delivery mechanism large enough to concentrate the toxin in the body long enough to damage health. There are no commercial nuclear power hazards in the US.
Both my parents worked at Chornobyl power plant and helped to liquidate the disaster. My husband’s father - an army officer, cut down and buried red forest surrounding Chornobyl. My husband’s grandfather was among the first firefighters on duty after the Chornobyl explosion.
Yes, I do want the development of nuclear energy, as this is the only way a country like mine can get energy independence and not become a colony.
My father was also a liquidator, also a military(MVD) major. He was on the roof of reactor building at some point. I wonder If they've met each other, what a small world we live in.
No it is not the only way your country can be energy independent and whomever told you that completely lied to you. Look at the last site built in the US that came in massively over budget and would have never been completed without public funding from the state of Georgia and federal funding to begin with. The building costs have skyrocketed in a time when there isn't enough to go around as it is. Nuclear power has never been about power for the masses and has only ever been about uranium daughter procurement and a black market made out of thin air to sell it.
Paul Mobley
Nuclear is a much bigger fantasy than most religions. It’s pushed by psychopaths who will never have to deal with the future.
@@paulmobleyscience nuclear power was indeed for powering the masses and Industry especially in the early 60s and 70s. however there is some truth in your observation that they mainly focused on a certain kind of reactor which then made a nuclear product ideal for weapons.
@@MickeyMishra I disagree completely that it was for powering the masses and industry. Patents were made that are still making money today, the US Naval Research and Development worked with GE and Westinghouse (Clinton) to design and build various generations of reactors that have been bought and sold all around the world. It was said it would be so cheap it couldn't be metered and would be a cheap, reliable and safe energy source. They have been charging Trillions apon Trillions for over 60 years having to be all bailed out by the public because corporate greed has taken over. All the while people still live without fresh water, electricity and are still living in grass huts while we purify water to such a degree as to keep redox conditions from occurring while people die of thirst. People complain about not having power 24/7 365 days a year while some people still go every single day without power 365 days a year after 70 years. It's not politicians holding nuclear power back like you always hear....they are just privileged to certain information about a nuclear reactor and its fuel that most people don't know. They aren't keeping some magical answer for our energy needs held hostage from us all. They know that water soluble radionuclides travel around the planet and are in our drinking water without any way of removing it. They know if you add more exposure then throughout an entire life it will drastically cut lives shorter and shorter as it damages the genome with not enough time for it to repair the damage without passing it on to the next generation...like we are already seeing. They say hereditary and you hear runs in your family not understanding it's damage to the genome to your parents and grandparents that have already passed it onto you and me. And our grandchildren are next in line. They know this and why they only use 10% globally. Just enough to keep their certain uranium daughters rolling in the money.
The prices of art & classic cars are the first things to crash in a recession - see 80s and 08+ . Masterworks can in no way be framed as a recession proof investment.
be
Also, who determines the value of such artwork.
@@Boric78 you can edit your comments
@@nm-ce9vc Thanks bro - did not know that.
@@abhyudaysarkar5012 Exactly - its art. Hardly a quantifiable investment. My friends who were artists always told me art is valued by the viewer. When you combine that with the fact art tastes change with time - I see little long term safe returns here. Looks like another casino call to me.
In 2011 after the earthquake, I did a presentation at university, about the pros and cons of nuclear power, and I pretty much warned about how quitting nuclear power would be a bad idea.
We should’ve listen to you. But we did not.
@@franwex Maybe shouldn't have signed the paper as Peanutborn.
It's really sad because the emergency shutdown worked as intended, until the emergency diesel generators were flooded.
It was pure negligence, the operators had been warned by experts for over a decade to relocate the generators high above sea level.
That one decision not to listen to warnings in hindsight will result in an incalculable amount of C02 emissions. And will probably lead to 100's of thousands or even millions of early pollution related deaths over the next few decades due to lack of investment over the last 11 years.
It's quite horrifying really, like some sort of butterfly-like effect you'd only expect to hear of in si-fi stories.
The world of New Tens were naive, optimistic and operate as if money grow on tress.
Fast forward to 2022, how lives treat those students after they graduated and got thrown into work lives?
@Peanutborn Did you look into how many people would die if all the nuclear power plant around the world blew up? Quora said something like 2 million would die from all of them blowing up at the same time. Do you know if that's accurate?
With inflation at its highest level in four decades, recession is now "the most likely outcome for the economy". People wonder how to grow their portfolios to beat inflation and maintain a successful long-term strategy. I looked for investors who were making around $250,000 in this troubled market. This is one more reason why you should save and invest to secure your income and ensure your success
If you don't mind sharing, I think the market deserves the reward, and I know it's real, but how can it be?
There are many RIAs out there, but finding a trustworthy person to help seems to be a big problem. That's why I'm working with Larry Kent Nick and so far it's been worth it. Larry Kent Nick doesn't go back on his words and unlike most financial advisors he isn't after your money but to make sure he serves you better.
That's great how ca i contact this Mr. Kent Nick ?
Connect with him on Instagram
@ Larry Kent Nick Trading
When innovation comes out of japan, it really comes out very well done
can you name some japanese innovations ?
@@woodennecktie bullet train, QR code, car navigation and...?
Hello?
Is that a Hiroshima joke?
@@ilhanafshin9136 Blue led as well, which was a big thing which powers a lot of our stuff today. If anything a funny anecdote I tend to share about living here is how things move really quickly only once there's an actual consensus reached. Like Japan can be really stubborn a lot of things, but once the majority is convinced on implementing something it moves pretty quickly.
The buildings in Tokyo are built to withstand earthquakes up to a certain level and have been holding up well over the many years of earthquakes. I'm very confident that Japan will apply the lessons learned from Fukushima to building future nuclear power plants. Ganbatte Nippon!
Not putting the emergency diesel pumps in the basement below see level could also improve the saftey :)
There is another nuclear power plant in Japan that was closer to the epicenter than Fukushima. It was also hit by a tsunami. You never heard of it because they didn’t cut corners when designing it.
Fukushima was a man made disaster, not a natural disaster.
@@asnierkishcowboy, Exactly.
@@terjeoseberg990 please. Japan's officials didn't know what to do when the nuke plant got shafted
@@miaya3898, Of Course. After the meltdown that was caused by bad design, there wasn’t anything they could do. Yet the other nuclear power plant that was closer to the epicenter was fine. Nothing had to be done.
One of the best things about continuing to advance nuclear reactor technology is that newer generations of reactors require less enriched materials. Not only does this mean less radioactive waste but it means that what would be a spent fuel rod for an older reactor could be a fresh one in a newer one allowing some nuclear waste to be recycled and if we can get reactors to the point that enrichment is entirely unnecessary, we can provide nuclear reactors to countries without providing them the means to create enriched materials for nuclear weapons. One of the rare silver linings of Putin's horrible war is that the industrialized world is finally seeing reason on nuclear power. The sooner we can replace dirty coal and dangerous nuclear reactors from the 60's with much cleaner modern nuclear the better.
If they can find an industrial use for the waste material that would be revolutionary. I suspect with new developments in space technology they may be able to transports several tons of it into space and sent it towards saturn.
Are they good enough that you can put depleted rods from the barrels stored back in the 60's into it and it will run, for they need only a fraction of uranium yields compare to old reactors?
What happens with nuclear power stations if the world gets punched with an large solar flare and the electronic and electrical systems go down? It’s kinda time consuming to shut them down or throttle back.
@Brian Chin
SMR that this video talks about requires more enriched uranium and leaves behind a lot more waste than conventional reactors.
@@stanweaver6116 That's exactly the point in the High Temperature Reactors... They don't need to be throttled down.
They're inherently down and pushed into operation by its controlling systems.
When their controlling systems shut-down for any reason (i.e. EMP), they simply stop getting the push and stop reacting.
Their core "freezes" (e.g. solidify) so as its reaction.
This type of reactor is known since the dawn of the nuclear energy era but, guess what, as it didn't have potential to produce plutonium as a "side-effect", it has been buried and kept in the dark until not too long ago. (i.e. plutonium is the primary nuclear fuel to nuclear weapons).
The countries that have had (and still have) nuclear weapons are to blame here, because while they promoted the - now considered - "Normal" reactors as a means to produce electricity, they were all looking at their side products and not the electricity itself. (and they lured their countries people into financing what was, in fact, plutonium factories in disguise)
Then the cold war ended and nuclear non-proliferation treaties came, and who was still there to promote that crappy, dirty and unsafe technology? No one!
With all the accidents that were to be had (and happened to no one's surprise), of course that as soon as the military "push" lost its primary purpose , the nuclear energy industry (as it was ill-conceived) succumbed to its own heavy environmental footprint.
But that.doesn't mean Nuclear Energy is to doomed.
It only needs innovation.
There's a lot to be learned and gained.
I think SMRs are critical to the future. Every country is going to have to be responsible for its own energy security. We have a lot of land in the US, so plenty of places to put it. SMRs could be used to run heavy industry, as well as getting the big fossil fuel companies to start moving off of drilled products and just producing hydrogen and other hydrocarbons as needed. It could also be used to make plastic recycling efficient. Another good idea is to create regional hydrogen production in coal producing areas to shift the jobs to that away from coal mining.
YES!
> MODULAR
> Self-contained
> Super affordable & easily scalable
> Maybe even safe enough to put near cities and suburbs?
That is fine but all of our products are made from oil we can not stop drilling for oil everything you own has oil products in it
Here in the states, we just approved the first models of micro reactors. Hopefully that means we will join Japan and bootstrap our flailing hydrogen fuel cell and ICE conversion programs.
Fukushima was no accident, but incompetence and arrogance. Tokyo energy was warned many times regarding the placement of the backup generators and not having redundancy.
This does NOT get publicized enough. Cheers.
Don't forget the hole in the wall... FFS that was a goofed move
@@renealarcon3970 Another thing That doesn't get publicized enough is that her sister plant was used as a shelter during the whole event. As well as differences between her and Fukushima daichi
Actually this wasn't the Tokyo Electrics. It was the Japanese government who didn't want to release radioactive materials in front of the world. Also they didn't want to release the radioactive materials if released to prevent an accident it could have reached Tokyo Yokohama which would have affected the Financial Capital. Also the Japanese government demanded to provide electricity to the ppl in Tokyo rather than sending the electricity to the Fukushima plant after the backup generators failed. Also another small reason was that the US government didn't want the US military service men to be affected by the radiation which pressured the Japanese to not release the radioactive water which was also partially the cause. This problem was because we had so much difficulty maintaining the situation. US Japanese ppl don't care about electricity if something was used for good but the stupid leading party failed us that's why we are gonna choose the liberals from now on.
@@nishi07 the back up generators were flooded. The grid was
disconnected, so Tokyo energy /electric was at fault. 3 years before the tsunami number of international experts visited the facilities, they made it clear that backuo gerators location was at risk of flooding and that there was no redundancy. Those warnings were given before than as well.
"Disinvestment" is a nice word.
Japan is an example of plain Common Sense reactions to necessity. Good to see.
We already have a word for it. Divest.
What I like living here is the weird duality of how things usually go for issues like these. Japan can be one of the most stubborn and slow-moving country to decide on issues like nuclear, but once a consensus is actually made due to circumstances (like now and rising electricity costs) it moves really quickly otherwise. Like it may take it years due to bureaucracy or public discourse to decide something but once everyone gave an ok for the plan implementation is usually really fast.
I would worry less about CO2 emissions, aka what plants breath, and more about running out of gas. Which we are. That’s a much bigger problem considering it’s accounts for basically all of our energy, and building things like power plants and solar panels requires a ton of gas.
Short term we have to do what we have to do. What we can't do is find ourselves blackmailed by Authoritarian regimes ever again. Friendly countries need to find a way to band together for all things.
Agreed. It sucks to see countries try to do the best thing for its citizens then stop because a bully forces them to stop. Some countries have railroad lines that link them to their trade partners which is a huge benefit. But the bully does not the trade partner and puts sanctions on the country forcing it to trade with the USA. It remains to be seen if BRICS and other countries, that want to trade in non dollar currencies, will have a positive effect.
It’s a big yes to SMR from me 👍🏻 .We need to escape from the grip of OPEC countries.
Oil lobby in general, the refining companies are in cahoots with opec.
@@puraLusa What do you mean? All the companies own Oil and nuclear and solar and natural gas and wind and hydro. There is no one industry or the other anymore.
@@paulmobleyscience understand the word cahoot and u'll understand exactly what I mean. Also, check out what the oil lobby did in the past, key word here is lead.
@@puraLusa Cahoots you say? Ok....Cahoots would be General Electeic and the US Naval Research and Development along with Westinghouse that has patented all this out of war and weaponry. Everything was top secret, including all the materials from books learned with today. Things like the inverse square law does not apply to extended sources of radiation stated in the Bureau of Standards volume 3 pages 81-82 1907. This law and formula is used to calibrate amd take measurements with a Geiger Muller tube along with various other radiation detection monitors. Add issues such as Townsend electron avalanche and quenching gas, gamma attenuation, dead time, saturation of the tube and the need for a perfect voltage from a battery all shows how really that Cahoots word really works. The scientists said Tritium is harmless and passes through the body within a months time....now we know that isn't true and Tritium will bind directly to the cell to form Organically bound Tritium. They said it would be so cheap it couldn't be metered yet they've been charging us all Trillions apon Trillions ever since. Oil and gas became second the moment the US Government and Military took over the world with their nuclear weapons and reactors to mask what they actually do with all the daughters. Americium in smoke detectors, Cobalt 60 in high pressure gauges, Yttrium-90 and others for the medical field to fight cancer that was more than likely caused by a radionuclide to begin with and of course the 1% Plutonium.
Hi Sandy, have you done much research away from youtube on SMRs? Whats your take on the TRISO pebble fuel for starters and do you understand the issues Nuscale had with their condenser which caused the whole failsafe shutdown to actually fail and not operate as intended?
I’d really wish that the advertisement on this channel was as clearly marked as it is done in Germany. It makes it much easier to appreciate the really interesting and good journalistic work without constantly having to ask myself if this is just a Segue to a Sponsor :( It somewhat makes the experience of watching the channel to inform myself a lot worse.
Edit: misspelled "segue"
there's no real world for the feeling, but you feel slightly misled or betrayed, or the perception is tainted because there is a doubt about the seriousness, or if it's an advertisement script
Sponsor block (one word) is your friend.
This is a Zionist Chanel , he is a Jewish nationalist .
How's people still watching ads in 2022
@@moRaaOTAKU On phones and PCs and/or browsers they cannot install adblock on, that's how. And it's unfortunate.
If you want hydrogen, use solar / wind / ... to produce hydrogen (and oxygen) during sunny times, store it, use the hydrogen directly OR burn the H2 O2 and run turbines / make electricity in off times.
can't store hydrogen efficiently. small molecule wants to escape.
@@twhite5085 There are different ways to effectively store hydrogen, but yes, it's the smallest molecule.
This is a perfect example of how people grow through suffering.
Great Japan !!! All hail The Emperor !!! 🇯🇵
Annoying thing about nuclear is that development of technology and industry has been totally nerfed for about half a century.
Nuclear at this point is like solar panels decade ago, nuclear is still after all these years quite untapped well of technology where we could do a lot of improvements.
Not to mention just the fact that because we stopped building as much nuclear energy plants, we are far more dependent on fossil fuels, thus far more unstable society and further in the climate change.
I know right the technology has already been developed for 4th gen nuclear YEARS ago the US navy has been slowly improving their nuclear design for years to the point that the newest aircraft carrier produces HAIF as much energy as a nuclear power plant
The problem is that a 25 ton container of high level nuclear waste is more scary to the public than the invisible 10 million metric tons of CO2 emitted by a coal fired power plant (Assuming both are 1GW power sources)
@@randomaccount53793
That is because they also don't see the tons of coal ash that is classified as nuclear waste
because of the greedy oil companies that will do anything just to stop using clean energy just to gain profits. Now the whole world is suffering from climate change and it gets worst everyday, here in our country were having abnormal heavy rains for weeks and strong typhoons like category 4 or 5, and other parts of the world that are experiencing intense heat and drought.
That is because of big fossil fuel lobbying against it behind the scenes. The way to handle it is to convert that industry to the nuclear side. How? Approving SMRs for them to work on producing hydrogen and other hydrocarbons (needed for other industries like pharma and chemical production) and start working towards weaning them off drilled products and going with directly produced ones. It wouldn't happen overnight, but you give them a taste and get them hooked and those industries stop fighting nuclear and investing in its development so they can do more with it.
No current nuclear reactor can "go into fusion". Probably you mean "meltdown" ot something like that, but nuclear fusion is an entirely different process, currently undergoing development at ITER and other current and future sites.
Yeah, that wording confused me. I can understand the logic of using that word to describe a meltdown, but fusion is already an active term in nuclear energy.
He means fission probably
@@japzone It's probably fission which seperates
Fission is what nuclear reactors do all the time. Uncontrolled nuclear fission is when things start getting turned sideways
Even more so, heavy elements tend to absorb energy when fusing. Sadly, there's no english version of the article..
de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massendefekt
The most ideal solution to the energy shortages.
Humans naturally never do something about a shitty situation until it's too late...
No Hawaiian shirt and not awfully exaggerated gestures? Fascinating. Feels much more serious and professional. Loved the video.
Seems like every coal plant that gets shuttered should be get one of them small modular reactors. The transformers and transmission lines can be reused for a great cost savings. Likewise the labor force would have a lot of transferrable skills for the new plant.
Interesting perspective.
Rich people want to sell their art to poor people's pool, befire prices crash.
Most of the world's population is in dictatorships.
Do they get nuclear industries ???
@@MsMrmarshall You posted that in the wrong space.
@@skylineXpert the real difficulty is the existing national grid is only big enough for today's demand.
When all the high energy density fossil fuels are replaced with electric energy then, as he said, more grid capacity, that is more grids at huge expense.
3 to 5 fold bigger.
So the $TRILLIONS and decades in the existing grid has to be added to and not even this video mentions these extras.
Even more power stations, silence!!!?
It’s ironic that a coal plant releases more radiation (from traces of Uranium, Thorium & Radon in the coal) in one week that a Nuclear plant would in it’s 75+ year lifetime.
9:01 "the core cannot go into fusion" ... This is a good example that mass media people are not able to speak on anything other than politics and celebrity gossip.
Japan going all in on hydrogen over batteries might finally pay off. Between this and the oceanic hydrogen off their shore, they will be well setup
It may work for Japan that are heavily invested in nuclear and do not have easy cheap access to natural gas.
They will probably still have to use natural gas no matter what they are claiming.
Just for note, most of Europe is now experimenting of putting 15-20% mix into the natural gas pipelines as in that volume traditional natural gas heaters and cooking hardware can operate normally. So If only this becomes a standard, that is a lot of hydrogen consumption starting overnight.
Sounds unsafe
@@dustintacohands1107 why? Flamable gas like flamable gas. My cousin was in pilot program with his whole village since July with I believe 15% hydrogen in pipes. He didnt noticed the difference.
There are advanced plans to produce hydrogens with wind and nuclear in Europe as well.
The Europeans had planned to reform natural gas to make hydrogen. Incredibly wasteful but it sounds good. Nuclear power generates enormous amounts that has to be reformed back into water. When it could easily bf used as fuel.
@@dustintacohands1107 natural gas is more unsafe. you have to add sulfurous chemicals to it because if it leaks, no one will notice until people start passing out, and then it will explode when it hits a spark. adding hydrogen would likely not change the risk profile as long as the sulfurous chemicals are still present, and it would reduce the smoke, soot and carcinogenic particles inside of and expelled by homes by a significant amount.
The U.S. Navy has been operating small nuclear reactors for years. Bout time we start using small reactors that are proven safe and clean up the fossil fuels.
Once again Japan quietly developing a technology that might very well save mankind. Good job.
Japan is going golden Era again. Any nation that builds nuclear widely, safely and effectively. Will survive the oil wars to come. Will grow economically. Will innovate. When you get down to brass tacks. Nuclear is the best, most environmentally friendly, safest. Source of power currently available on Earth.
SMRs are mass manufactured and you only need the housing that would take 24 to 36 months to build.
The Japanese Idea on this is just genius. SMRs can be mass manufactured and the housing of it can be easily built within 24 to 36 months you can use this for a block to produce enough electricity to maintain fully electric transportation + Hydrogen that can be used to produce extra electricity and water.
Mastering this not only gives them a good base but also this technology would be very useful for many countries. Especially countries with a lack of drinking water.
But again from a naive Idea until reality exists the hell of details.
What about nuclear waste?
@@Xenstein Japan has been dealing with nuclear waste for decades. This also is a chance for new companies specialized in such to oppen which means even more jobs.
@@Xenstein, It's a fascinating topic if you care to research it.
Like I never known the most un destructible object ever created by mankind ever was done by the nuclear waste industry. Or how they use fracking to insert nuclear waste into the layer of earth that would never be resurfaced again in layers way below water sources and etc. Also, recycling nuclear fuel is a very profitable industry.
The reality of the matter is, there are no cleaner sources of energy.
@@danushairan thanks
@@Xenstein Nuclear technology has improved so much that they are beginning to reclaim old nuclear waste for reusable fuel....And they are only getting better at this. Combine that with these new "mini-reactors" that can be constructed and deployed more cheaply and safely in a matter of months and not decades, and it's a game changer....These will also have a huge impact on the Natural Gas market as well, since Natural Gas will be used much less for heating and electricity and more for heavy industry. Translation: Russia has just shot itself in the foot with the Ukraine War. They will never regain those lucrative European and Asian markets again....
Thorium molten salt reactors should be the wave of the future. They are intrinsically safe since they will shut down if not kept properly controlled; plus, thorium is abundantly available, and the reactors can be used to consume much of the existing radioactive waste from conventional reactors.
Nuclear is the best energy source. In fact ALL energy ultimately comes from nuclear reactions.
Nuclear is safe, clean, always-on, and carbon free. An electrical economy requires nuclear.
Fukushima was built in the wrong place, it shouldn't have been built so close to sea level and the Japanese knew this, there are stone markers in Japan that are 600 years old that say "Don't build below this marker"...The Japanese ignore these warnings....
Yeah, totally out of context. 1400s Japanese were not capable of building concrete tsunami walls, buddy.
Go Japan go we love you from America
Czech Republic just announced 4 new big reactors, one is in bidding proces. And up to 15 SMRs in place of coal plants and district heating plants, but that needs change in legislature, regulation and common EU type approval fot SMRs. Still I see tbe bright future full of light and heat.
yep, it's very late but at least things are slowly moving. Imagine if these things were prioritized a decade ago.
This is what I like!
Way to go Japan 🇯🇵
Good video Josh, keep it up!
great job japan for supporting the rest of the free world and embrasing nuclear energy :)
We need someone like Japan to figure out, and make use of dilithium crystals.
She cannae take it
Thank you for sharing the knowledge.
"[...]due to it's design the core cannot go into fusion." Nuclear fusion is not typically a issue in a nuclear reactor accident. The conditions are a bit different from a thermonuclear warhead. What's typically a risk for blowing up nuclear reactors is chemical hydrogen explosions. I'm guessing what you meant to say was replacing the water cooling agent by helium - which is an inert noble gas - reduces this risk of hydrogen explosions. Helium prices are currently going through the roof though...
Ah yes, Helium would never explode... laughs in Hindenburg :P
@@markusz4447 you know that was Hydrogen, right?
@@markusz4447 That blimp had hydrogen in it, which is why it caught fire, hydrogen is very flammable.
Helium is inert and for all practical purposes will never blow up, catch fire, or chemically react with anything
@@duncanreeves225 thx for the clarification
@@markusz4447 current blimps are using helium, because Hindenburg used hydrogen
It’s long over due in Australia our government are simply a joke
To add another point. After 2020-21 lockdowns the world population went from 7 billion to 8.2 billion. Now just think about how that'll affect the energy sector.
No it takes about 12 years to add billion people and falling
I live in the Phoenix area. We have had a a nuclear power plant about 75 miles away. It has run well for over 59 Years. Never understood why the hesitation.
Here in Canada, the Darlington Nuclear facility on Lake Ontario near Toronto is already setting itself up to build a small cluster of SMRs near the old CANDU reactors, which will probably decommissioned by 2050.
Is Canada doing there own design or someone else designs and what is the timeline ?
@@southcoastinventors6583 Unfortunately not Canadian designs. GE-Hitachi’s BWRX-300 appears to be a front runner. Canada should be championing CANDU technology both domestically and for export. This is not to throw shade on the BWRX-300, a fine reactor. But why not support your own good tech?
@@AngelicaAtomic Yeah that too bad, have they ever talked about or built a prototype SMR using the heavy water reactor design that CANDU is based on ? Thanks for the reply.
SMR's won't succeed. They are way less fuel efficient than classical bigger reactors. Uranium isn't getting cheaper.. They won't be economically viable.
These SNR's could also safeguard the existing HWR plants with backup power for cooling
Being helium cooled is a huge problem considering the world is going to have a helium shortage.
No Russia has plenty of it, no shortage
Anywhere with natural gas is a source of helium.
It annoys me when they refer oil as gas.
Rolls Royce has been researching into SMR for a while now. Britain too will go all in with SMRs in the close future.
I am also hopeful for Westinghouse's new modular liquid lead (aka liquid metal) coolant based reactor designs for the US. I could see such plants in the high desert area's of Cali since they don't require water for cooling and only some for steam generators. Helping solve a lot of Cali's energy needs without building plants near critical fresh water sources or near major urban areas there by avoid NIMBY issues. Though I am no fan of nuclear, I also know we have wasted to much time screwing around about pollution and climate change. So now we have to accept the best of the bad options.
Actually, needing cooling water or not is independent of the reactor design. ALL of today's reactors could be retrofitted with dry air coolers (no water needed). However, dry air cooling is just less efficient and more expensive than open or closed water cooled systems.
That's why today dry air cooling is only used to cool small plants with low thermal power. But in theory, given enough space and money, you can cool anything using these.
California should just find a way to power their state with feces since it's everywhere on the streets it should be easy to power their whole state by just people pooing
The current energy crisis is a great example of decisions being made based on political whims instead of logic
Truth is, Japan has been a world leading mover and shaker for more than a hundred years.
It takes uranium to run nuclear power plants. So, where will all that uranium come from? Right now Kazakhstan is the largest supplier of uranium in the world, exceeding 40% of the market. You know, the same Kazakhstan that is famous for its democratic regime, its respect for human rights, its independence of Russia, etc...
That's one of the reasons why Toyota not jumping at EV hype. All those other manufacturers who move away from internal combustion engine, may regret it in near future.
Yeah that's the reason why our indian minister not allowed elone musk's Tesla with his Many terms and condition plus extra soften rules for his company ! Cuz it's not solving any emissions issue rn! India instead he come in Toyota mirai lol and promote HYDROGEN based vehicle! Even now India's First hydrogen train is there. !
Really Japan helping alot India!
Toyota going well and our Indian Billionaire started a rade between eachother one of them investing 70 bilion $ and another one invested 90 bilion $ people's saying they are gambling but i can see the green future!
This would be much needed in South Africa, even though there's one nuclear plant located in the Western Cape it only covers the Western Cape alone. Not mention the power prices increasing dispite the blackouts, but apparently South Africa is turning to Gas.
Not likely now with the price of natural gas.
Escom needs to reform add independent producers to the grid to stop outages.
You are close to Angola and Mozambique, which booth have gas and oil resources, and present no strategic threats to you, so it makes sense.
SA can't even makes farms safe
Sasol Company..
Poland is building nuclear plant till 2013... but we stil don't pick the place. We spend like 900 mld PLN and nothing is build.
There is a flaw in this video: nuclear energy is not cheap. Its actually pretty expensive
i've been hearing a lot about new design ideas for nuclear reactors, focusing on making them safer than the traditional models. i'd like to see some such more advanced, safer designs being built for productive use
There are already quite a few in the world. Most modern plants (like the ones in France for example) are built with modern radiation shielding and staff that are well trained in how to operate the plants, with countless failsafes. AND they can recycle old radioactive waste to get even more energy out of it instead of burrying it in the ground after a single use.
The future variants to look out for are molten salt reactors and various types of small modular reactors which are cheaper and faster to build, and even safer to use.
The only blockade, is the general world population's lack of knowledge in the field to compensate for the excess fear mongering associated with nuclear as a whole (not just fission, but fusion too).
This video gives me hope for the future. One thing you didn't touch on is the waste from these new, small, safe reactors. Is there highly toxic waste and if so, what's the plan to dispose of it?
send it to outer space xd
Send it to afrika for the starving children.
It's not actually that big of a problem
Send it to russia. They have plenty of vast space.
The amount of waste is similar. But the waste issue is not technical, it's political. Science knows how to dispose of them safely for decades now. There are three classifications of nuclear waste. Low level, medium, and high. Low level waste can be disposed like regular waste after a short period of time. Medium level waste requires storage for a few decades. High level waste can be radioactive for thousands of years, but they're only 3% of the total waste. We can either put them in deep geological storage, or if we want to reduce them even further, recycle them with breeder reactors. We can't eliminate the waste entirely (but then again we can't eliminate waste entirely no matter what we use) but we can reduce them a lot. Anyway, high level nuclear waste can be disposed in deep geological boreholes. The amount is small enough even without recycling that this is possible.
'Nuclear is good, but dont build the plant near my house'
The only complaint anyone has ever had about Nuclear has been the chance of explosion and death for millions when things go wrong, if these new reactors are so safe they can never melt down, than what are we waiting for.
Romania is also in this trend. A location has already been selected for the first SMR to be built. Also 2 more regular nuclear reactors will be built next to the two ones that are already producing electricity.
What about nuclear waste?
@@Xenstein What about the waste? It's never been a technological problem, only a political one.
One thing I am concerned about is that hydrogen is too light and it can escape earth. Once it goes to space, it can not be recovered. So, if everyone start using hydrogen as fuel, it's inevitable that some of it will escape. I wonder if it will have a negative effect in earth since losing it might cause imbalance in earth.
It recombines with oxygen and will eventually make water again.
@@majorchungus my thought too
@@majorchungus i think even if both hydrogen and oxygen is present, it wouldn't combine unless you give it a little "kick" like igniting it with fire to form water. So in the atmosphere, some or maybe most of the hydrogen will just go out in the outer space. I'm talking about leaked hydrogen here from refuelling or during production, or maybe defective hydrogen containers.
@@MEOW-sh9qz Hydrogen is extremely difficult to contain, NASA has been having that problem with launching their first Artemis rocket due to hydrogen leaks. The natural gas pipeline infrastructure is incapable of being used for hydrogen.
@@MEOW-sh9qz I googled it and you are correct.
Thanks for yet another excellent video
Because of the fearmongering, we didn't got much development in nuclear tech in the West, I mean fusion is cool but it's not guaranteed, why not improve fission? Even the thorium reactors seemed to be forgotten.
Hydrogen is extremely inefficient - as the lightest gas it's notoriously easy for it to escape the tanks, pipes, delivery networks. Over 35% is lost before you even get to use it. It's also low in energy density compared to other types of gases thus we'll need much larger storage facilities. Not a great option.
Hydrogen also makes up 75% of the mass in the universe so is ridiculously abundant and cheap, so it doesn't really need to be efficient
hydrogen is the most energy dense chemical fuel we have gram for gram. leakage is not a big deal if it is being produced inexpensively and in great quantity by clean sources, like nuclear
@@Pawn2e4 It sure is common in the universe. Wanna go grab some from the Sun or Jupiter real quick and bring it back for cheaper than another energy source? The only real source we have is water, and every time we use hydrolysis to split it into H and O, we permanently lose some H which flows out to space.
I imagine non helium models will also be made later
If there is a lot of by-product why not use hydrogen even if it is over short distances.
way to go Japan,we are proud of you all in America ,all the best to you all, portable and main plants ,hurdles for green will go faster with all of the problems we are facing , at this pivotal point in time
😂😂😂
I very much doubt 1945 has been forgotten yet...
Whichever country first makes a breakthrough in nuclear power, the whole world will benefit.
They won't manage to do it
That's Japan for you, everything is just show off with no real results
Japan considers itself number one in every possible way which brings its politicians to bullshit promises like for example Abe in 2020 "the Japanese drug to cure covid-19, Avigan will be out in 6 months" it's been 2 years since it was supposed to be out and no-one talks about it anymore
Why? Because Japaneses thought they're better than anyone despite being far from being the lead in drugs conception and what was deemed to happen happened, a failure
Due to that overconfidence they didn't deem useful to secure vaccines and that is the reason Japan was so late on the whole process
need to force city officials to cut own weath to support daca+ lower taxes permanently by big amount for all those making below 150k per year to prove daca worth it since for ages DC never lower living cost only print dollars to do more refugee crisis
when muller charge manafort for things nothing to do with russia hack but let podesta go for same reason =blackmail dc/Tories(thank Blair Iraq) to support blame russia to cover up fact 2 party system failed since mccain-hillary all did united fruit company scandal 2.0 but remain rich
look at this list!
left wing media give protest t-shirts to san quan mayor for lying about never receive maria supplies
th-cam.com/video/qYmCtYLE9k0/w-d-xo.html
george bush 14y ago said add ukraine to nato foreshadow nuland f eu coup 2014 support =
1. th-cam.com/video/nTQ3D1a-j20/w-d-xo.html
2001 pentagon memo kill occupy iraq to syria
th-cam.com/video/_mrJRHwbVG8/w-d-xo.html
current ukraine gov is proxy since obama drew red line just like did in syria earlier arming rebels telling russia not to interfere while zelensky ethnic cleanse donbass region 7y=
2. th-cam.com/video/ta9dWRcDUPA/w-d-xo.html
3. th-cam.com/video/IBeRB7rWk_8/w-d-xo.html
dnc establishment kill 50 in vegas/portland, thugs attack with stand down cops san jose/charlotte, burn loot several months, sabotage afgan withdraw using russia bounty smear to give taliban equip, crash car in to wisconsin parade thanks to nbc follow jury bus smearing ritten house too
th-cam.com/video/UxoL8tHSa7g/w-d-xo.html
ray epps-fake sole survivor from ritten house case 2.0/podesta 2.0 when you look at left wing msm collaborate
th-cam.com/video/OnVHhn-vgUw/w-d-xo.html
@@protorhinocerator142 all of the breakthroughs in nuclear power were already completed as late as the early 80s. much of the documentation for it is still at Los Alamos Research Center.''
the real problem with nuclear power is that it is a fixed-rate resource. That means that it's price can never go up and can only go down there for its production can only get cheaper which as you know, those people that like to put metering devices on electrical lines don't really like since there's not a lot of money involved or could be gained from process.
there's also that Troublesome problem that in order for a society to enjoy cheap energy they also need to have a high IQ or simply a work ethic somewhere to the west of the past. But a high IQ and knowledgeable public is the antithesis for politics since you can't pull the wool over people's eyes.
Hydrogen Diffusion enters the Chat
“reactor goes into fusion”, everything you need to know about the readiness of this fission reactor
problem is if we go all in on nuclear we will have a issue on the Reserves. i hope we then consider building a Thorium concept reactor since if we can use Thorium we are good for a long time
What are the reserves? There's plenty of Both Uranium and Thorium. There's those breeders that really extend the fuel supply. MOX fuel is supposed to work well too.
Major producing countries are Kazakhstan, Canada, Australia and Namibia. We should be safe as we had Canada, Australia in the mix
@@daniellarson3068 Its hard to say exact as there are to many factors and as i try to say if we are able to unlock thorium we can double the time more or less. right now if we go full nuclear they estimate 75-80 years of viable fuel to be there. i am sure the number will be bigger if we scrape the barrel but then it gets quite expensive i assume with our current extraction and recycle techniques.
@@shintsu01 Yes - 3 to 4 X as much Thorium as Uranium
Thorium is just a concept and not a real type of reactor that is in demonstration.
the main thing that makes a nuclear plant take so long to build is people lobbying against it. I think people would be genuinely shocked at how fast it could get done if governments firmly decided on it, adopted a standardized layout and just went fully in
There is always the big problem of storing the waste. And getting enough uranium, as there is also limited supply of uranium that at current rate would only last around 90 years. And if consumption would increase drastically, it would run out even faster.
@@Nobody-Nowhere Hydrogen. Plutonium
@@Nobody-Nowhere The waste has never been a technological problem, merely a political one.
@@Nobody-Nowhere you rather store a little nuclear waste or filter coal ash with you lungs??? Your choice
@@Nobody-Nowhere The nuclear waste issue is a political one, not a technical one. Uranium isn't running out either because we can either switch to breeder reactors or get the uranium from seawater or both.
Great work Thank you
I liked the concept of modular reactors from the beginning. I have a friend who was involved with South Africa's research into it. It was quite well advanced with it but ANC politics killed the project. Most of the scientists involved left South Africa for countries who had better appreciation of their talents.
I, for one, am all for it.
Yes, as hydrogen is close to our current infrastructure and can be used the way as we use now petrol, gas & coal.
🤣 Wow. That's simplistic drivel.
not even close to being true. Basically anything that currently uses gas, coal or petrol would be unable to use hydrogen instead without MASSIVE refits. Hydrogen is not an easy material to work with compared to those and is MUCH less energy efficient.
I wonder if retrofitting of old power plants with SMRs is feasible.
no
Actually yes, that is what Terrapower is doing in wyoming in the US at the moment, so it has the potential in the future to save billions in not having to increase poles and wires spending to link up the solar and wind farms.
One of the australian states WA just estimated an extra 10bil in spending is required for new poles and wires for the renewables grid..
Thats 5 SMRs...
@@Chad-mf5vo putting patches on a just flat out broken system does nothing in the long run. the grid needs a major overhaul. it actually needed it 20 years ago but i digress...
Yes, it is, sort of. The old plants l, like Rancho Seco, closed by stupid men like David Freeman, are still a storage area, and secure. tlThe grid infrastructure is still there, because now SMUD burns fossil fuel natural gas to replace the carbon-free nuclear plant.
So f---ing stupid!!!
Finally! I have been talking about using nuclear sources to produce hydrogen for a number of years. The water pools that hold spent fuel rods generate hydrogen all day everyday. I always thought you could reuse that hydrogen for fuel cell vehicles, backup fuel cell generators on site, or if the volume is high enough, place a steel mill next to it to create "green steel", steel that does not require coal as a chemical element for it's production. Again, what this shows is that in the end, it takes research, development, engineering, and scaled testing to make this happen. We are long past the need of more activists, climate warriors, and message makers. The engineering and construction need to be done by those trained to do this kind of work and the politicians to give the support and get out of the way. This issue is meant to be SOLVED, not a neverending football match where people keep "cheering on" their team no matter what.
Nuclear, solar, thermal batteries, nano diamond batteries, clean hydrogen, hemp capacitors, these should be next steps for humanity
These modular reactors would be great for isolated areas, such as Norther Canada. Independently power a small town.
they're also great for spreading out a target of hostile influence (physical or cyber). If a single major powerplant is troubled, then it's bad for a lot of people. If a small reactor is out of service for a while, it will only affect a small portion of people temporarily, while other reactors can fill the gap in the meantime.
The way I see it - we need three things:
1. SMRs that can be built on production lines and FAST, shipped to the target location and turned on in a very short time. This achieves economies of scale, production line efficiencies and also allows generation to scale up (or down) with demand more organically - you don't need to tie up tens of billions of pounds/euros/dollars for a massive infrastructure gamble that spans any government's term in office.
2. Whatever has evolved from the MIT WAMSR concept - a reactor that burns nuclear waste (their molten salt concept could run on nuclear waste material and burn 20 tonnes to a chunk perhaps 3-4kg with a 400 year half-life). This generates more power and eliminates the nuclear waste problem either partially or wholly.
3. For all of these issues - particularly climate science and energy production changes - to be treated as an engineering problem. Some dickhead with an arts degree dancing in traffic in front of a bus at peak hour isn't doing anything but making the whole situation significantly worse (this is for their own personal social gain). The entire paradigm needs to be treated as an engineering problem and the entire risk/reward and effort/funding sphere needs to be put into the hands of engineers. We need also to be tolerant of "solution evolution" - this means we will have technical and operational solutions which will become redundant over time or surpassed by other models. We shouldn't eschew them entirely because of this - an example is hydrogen production, this is increasing in efficiency but we can't "not" do it now because our current yield are lower than ideal. Build the solution - use it - upgrade it, replace it, recycle it.
We have to get ideological fashion out of this mix - the entire stagnation of the nuclear industry was the result of it falling in and out of political fashion over the decades and we are WELL behind where we should be now with this technical solution primarily because of this. Evolution of the technology and methodology allows us to update and improve safety, efficiency, viability, cost effectiveness and speed of implementation. In the UK I would dearly love to see these initial SMRs (the mini reactor being built by Rolls Royce comes to mind) put into productive use as soon as possible and as much learned from this up front; the fantasies about cessation of non-electric car sales will remain fantasies until we can actually charge the damn things and this generation is a big part of it.
And we can't sit around and wait for private power companies to slowly build them out. People talk about the expense. However in the U.S. we can raise defense spending by a 120 billion a year (was 646 billion in 2016, 778 in 2020). Imagine how we could transform our energy infrastructure if we put 120 billion a year into building it out.
Agreed. We need COMMERCIALIZED nuclear power.
Build the reactors in a new factory (calling Elon Musk) and you can have inspectors on-site inspecting every phase of construction.
Tight controls and standardization make the reactors safe. Economies of scale make them cheap. Build 20 a year and ramp up to 50 a year. Send them around the world.
Finland's Green party tranisition is just insane. The whole party began aften Chernobyl incident and their goal was to stop all nuclear power in Finland. Now they are quite supportive and that stance began before war in Ukraine as cutting carbon emissions have become more important
I have one issue with this idea. Producing H this way is going to be more expensive than one other possible source.
The Russian "super-deep" bore in Siberia, somewhere...at the end of a 12+ kilometer dig, the found water AND elemental H spewing out of the hole. Reports suggest they stopped drilling at that point.
If Russia can dig for elemental hydrogen, they can undersell any nuclear provider.
What if Siberia is the only crustal condition which allows (perhaps) a drilling approach to H extraction?
If depth is the concern, there have been plasma advances in the US that can penetrate the layers that make such deep bores so challenging. There is a significant up front cost, but after that, the ongoing energy production costs are trivial. This is primarily for geothermal energy production, but if elemental H is potentially a byproduct, then bonus.
Honest question here.
I see 'Ruptly' in the corner of nearly all your stock footage.
Ruptly is a Russian state owned media agency.
It doesn't help with credibility right now. I really like your content but I'm just interested. Is it cheap? Better than storyblocks? Russian news has been accused of stealing other channels' content recently.
I'm genuinely interested in the process.
i would be in favour of ireland doing it and using thorium molten salt reactors
I've been pro-nuclear since developers started developing extremely reliable reactors. To me, nuclear replacing fossil fuel usage accomplishes two things: energy independence AND virtually stopping pollution and in particular, heavy metals like mercury. Florida, where I live, has acidic rain due to Gulf of Mexico power plants spewing nitrogen products that combine with atmospheric water, then blown here by westerly winds. I routinely measure 5.8-6.4 pH from these rains.
I want to see North Korea ramp up their nuclear industry.
I'm all in, sounds pretty safe. ThankYou !
Japan has really gone downhill since Abe left
How so?
And here i was thinking that I was the only one who noticed this. Good call.
So sad that they killed him
@@Hilariusgamer the only thing sad about it was it didn't happen sooner
What the heck are you talking about. This is a good thing for everyone.
The new nuclear reactors they've designed are amazingly efficient and safe. This IS the future. One of those small closed reactor/turbine combo produces the same amount of electricity as HOW many tens of thousands of solar panels?
Even when you include Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima, nuclear power is by far the safest form of energy ever used.
Newer reactors don't have the same design flaws as these older ones, and can't melt down.
I agree this is the sane future. That doesn't mean we'll choose it though.
Does it, Germany?
Thanks for your views on this subject...
The hazards of every other source of energy individually are far greater than all nuclear incidents that have ever occurred
Five years ago, Australian media used to predict Australia's hydrogen energy breakthrough would end fossil fuel industry. Now we are hearing about nuclear fusion
@Bessie Hillum If it was easy to make, the cost shouldn't be too high? Since hydrogen is the most abundant element on earth
A lot more people are talking about Hydrogen now than 5 years ago CC. The Queensland government has given the go-ahead for a big plant in Gladstone. And working in the power industry I hear about it all the time. But I have not seen anyone seriously talking about fusion. What media are you watching?
@@priceprice_baby Five years ago, Sky News Australia said the country will export hydrogen energy soon. Nuclear fusion breakthrough has been mentioned on the US, the UK and European media
Hydrogen is to reactive and unstable. You need high compress tank to store the energy
@@containedhurricane skynews is rubbish and full of news based on gossip and talks nothing factual
Generally I have no problem with nuclear power. But in a earthquake zone great care needs to be taken. The mini nuclear plants would be excellent here. Also these plants are very vulnerable in times of war. Eg Ukraine. Apart from that I think they are excellent. For me Nuclear and Solar can solve all problems. Hydrogen byproduct is useful for trucks ships and planes but I think cars will be electric.
Nuclear plants should really be designed to withstand bombs. Iran for example built their's to handle it. No reason other nations can't.
do you think all dictators should have nuclear industries ??
@@tolazytothinkofanamd2351 Generally, they are designed to withstand a plane flying into them. That's basically a large bomb. But you won't be able to protect them against a determined military bombardment. I mean, nothing can really withstand that.
"Also these plants are very vulnerable in times of war. "
Big light water uranium oxide reactors are the ones that can blow up with a meltdown, and produce a lot of hydrogen from the water acting as radiation shielding.
SMR, thorium reactors, molten salt reactors, none of them have those problems, they don't meltdown, they don't blow up, in case of catastrophic failure they just cooldown and the reaction stops, they do not produce long lived high grade nuclear waster.
If only the world had invested in these new technologies instead of just quitting on nuclear all together.
Many problems with electric cars have become apparent, batteries take many times longer to charge in colder countries and battery usage time is reduced especially when towing.
High temp/low pressure makes sense for a safer design.
There are all sorts of problems with nuclear power, but if shutting down a nuclear power plant results in using more fossil fuels, then you have made things worse, not better.
Congrats on this Magazine Video. Glossy, snappy, speeded up, pumped-up, pairing oxymoronic visuals with narration to the point of distraction. A new form of click&stick-bait, that has to string out the incredible with the implausible, and smash them together with the sensational. Pur~lease!
Although demand may triple we wont need triple the energy sources... The majority of countries can supply power for a world cup final half time cuppa or mlnew years eve usage but we only need that much power once every so often, the rest of the time we use a fraction of that, we may find it more efficient pumping more power out of each source rather than expending energy regulating it to a lower output. If you understand power grids, their hardest job is making sure too much power isnt produced.
This does not apply to nuclear power. You can put it up and down in little time compared to fossil fuel plants or hydro plants. You basically adjust the lever for the reaction strength and increase of decrease the output power. You cannot do that in seconds when burning tonnes of coal, or similarly risk a flooding with hydro. This is a great benefit of nuclear power.
@@marsovac although nuclear has a bit more efficiency in winding up or down power production they are all based on turbine generated power and are limited by that, and it works just the same as increasing the BTU's for a gas powered plant and exposing more nuclear material for a reaction there is no real difference in how they manage the production.
Nuclear only goes wrong when people don't listen. Japan only had a meltdown because the company ignored warnings about their generators being at risk of flooding.